NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and NVIDIA T600 are both end-of-life graphics cards, but they target very different workloads despite sharing a manufacturer and similar average benchmark scores. The GTX 970 averages 7157 across all tests, while the T600 averages 7035, a margin of only 1.7%. However, this narrow overall gap masks a dramatic divergence in individual test results. The GTX 970 wins 8 of the 9 head-to-head comparisons, often by wide margins, while the T600 claims a single, significant victory in Vulkan compute. The data reveals two cards optimized for entirely different priorities: raw rasterization throughput versus modern API efficiency and power-conscious design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GTX 970’s dominance is most pronounced in the Passmark suite. In the DirectX 12 test, the GTX 970 scores 41 against the T600’s 25, a 64% advantage. This is the largest single-test delta between the two. The DirectX 11 result shows a similar story: 71 versus 49, a 44.9% lead for the GTX 970. Even in the older DirectX 10 and DirectX 9 tests, the GTX 970 is substantially ahead—46 versus 32 (43.8%) and 143 versus 114 (25.4%), respectively. The most lopsided result, however, comes from the Passmark G3D test, where the GTX 970 scores 9638 and the T600 scores 6479, a 48.8% difference. This test is a broad measure of 3D graphics performance, and the margin here is decisive.

Compute performance follows the same pattern. In Passmark GPU Compute, the GTX 970 scores 4073, while the T600 manages only 2402—a 69.6% advantage for the GTX 970, the largest delta across all tests. The Geekbench OpenCL result is closer but still favors the GTX 970: 29982 versus 27875, a 7.6% lead. The only test where the T600 wins is Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 25580 against the GTX 970’s 20005. That is a 21.8% margin in the T600’s favor, making it the clear outlier in an otherwise one-sided comparison.

The 2D performance is nearly identical. In Passmark G2D, the GTX 970 scores 764 and the T600 scores 756, a 1.1% difference that is effectively a tie. This suggests that for basic desktop and 2D workloads, either card performs equivalently. The overall picture is clear: the GTX 970 is significantly faster in every legacy DirectX test and in general compute, while the T600 only pulls ahead in a single modern API test.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on different architectures and process nodes. The GTX 970 uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The T600 uses the TU117 chip based on Turing architecture, also from TSMC but on a 12 nm process. The node difference is substantial: the 28 nm GTX 970 die measures 398 mm², while the 12 nm T600 die is only 200 mm². Despite the smaller die, the T600 packs 4,700 million transistors versus the GTX 970’s 5,200 million. This results in a much higher transistor density for the T600: 23.5M per mm² versus 13.1M per mm² for the GTX 970.

The compute configurations are vastly different. The GTX 970 has 1664 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 56 ROPs. The T600 has only 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This explains the GTX 970’s higher pixel rate of 65.97 GPixel/s versus the T600’s 42.72 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 122.5 GTexel/s versus 53.40 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute throughput tells the same story: the GTX 970 delivers 3.920 TFLOPS, while the T600 delivers 1.709 TFLOPS. However, the T600 has a notable feature the GTX 970 lacks: FP16 support at 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which the GTX 970 does not specify.

Memory systems also differ. Both have 4 GB of VRAM, but the GTX 970 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The T600 uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 160.0 GB/s. The GTX 970’s memory clock is 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the T600’s is 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The T600’s smaller bus limits its bandwidth despite the faster memory type. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is equivalent on paper.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 970 wins decisively in all rasterization-heavy workloads. The Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests all show the GTX 970 ahead by margins ranging from 25.4% to 64%. This makes it the clear choice for older DirectX titles and for any application that relies on traditional 3D rendering pipelines. The G3D score of 9638 versus 6479 reinforces this, indicating that the GTX 970 is substantially better at general 3D graphics. For compute tasks measured by Passmark GPU Compute and Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 970 also leads, with margins of 69.6% and 7.6% respectively. Users running GPU-accelerated compute in OpenCL will find the GTX 970 notably faster.

The T600’s single win is in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 25580 versus 20005, a 21.8% advantage. This suggests that for applications specifically optimized for Vulkan compute or rendering, the T600’s Turing architecture provides better efficiency. The T600 also has a massive power advantage: its TDP is 40 W versus the GTX 970’s 148 W. It requires no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the GTX 970 needs two 6-pin connectors and a 300 W PSU. The T600 is also a single-slot card, while the GTX 970 is dual-slot. For users prioritizing low power draw, minimal cooling requirements, or small physical footprint, the T600 is the superior option despite its lower raw performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw 3D performance?

A: The GTX 970 is significantly faster in 3D workloads. In the Passmark G3D test, it scores 9638 versus the T600’s 6479, a 48.8% lead. It also wins every DirectX test, from DirectX 9 (143 vs 114) to DirectX 12 (41 vs 25).

Q: Is the T600 better at any benchmark?

A: Yes, the T600 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 25580, compared to the GTX 970’s 20005. This is a 21.8% margin, making it the only test where the T600 outperforms the GTX 970.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: Both have 4 GB of memory, but the GTX 970 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for 224.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the T600 uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for 160.0 GB/s. The GTX 970’s wider bus gives it 40% more bandwidth.

Q: What about power consumption and physical size?

A: The T600 has a TDP of 40 W, requires no power connectors, and is a single-slot card. The GTX 970 has a TDP of 148 W, needs two 6-pin connectors, and is dual-slot. The T600 also suggests a 200 W PSU versus the GTX 970’s 300 W.

Q: Do they support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature levels are identical on paper, despite the different architectures.

Q: Which card has more compute units?

A: The GTX 970 has 1664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 56 ROPs. The T600 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 970’s FP32 throughput is 3.920 TFLOPS versus the T600’s 1.709 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

• Chip: GM204 (GTX 970) vs TU117 (T600)
• Architecture: Maxwell 2.0 vs Turing
• Process Node: 28 nm vs 12 nm
• Transistors: 5,200 million vs 4,700 million
• Die Size: 398 mm² vs 200 mm²
• Transistor Density: 13.1M / mm² vs 23.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1050 MHz vs 735 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1178 MHz vs 1335 MHz
• Memory Type: GDDR5 vs GDDR6
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 224.4 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1664 vs 640
• TMUs: 104 vs 40
• ROPs: 56 vs 32
• Pixel Rate: 65.97 GPixel/s vs 42.72 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 122.5 GTexel/s vs 53.40 GTexel/s
• FP32: 3.920 TFLOPS vs 1.709 TFLOPS
• FP16: Not specified vs 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 148 W vs 40 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs Single-slot
• Power Connectors: 2x 6-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 300 W vs 200 W
• Display Outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 vs 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
• Release Date: 2014-09-18 vs 2021-04-11
• Predecessor: GeForce 700 vs Quadro Volta
• Successor: GeForce 10 vs Workstation Ampere

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload. The GTX 970 is the superior choice for any task involving traditional 3D rendering, legacy DirectX applications, or general-purpose compute. Its wins in every DirectX test, from 25.4% in DirectX 9 to 64% in DirectX 12, make it the stronger card for gaming and graphics workloads. Its Passmark G3D score of 9638 versus 6479 and GPU Compute score of 4073 versus 2402 further cement its dominance in these areas. Users who need maximum performance per watt for heavy rendering should pick the GTX 970, provided they can accommodate its 148 W TDP, dual-slot size, and 300 W PSU requirement.

The T600 is the better option only when its specific advantages matter more than raw performance. Its 21.8% lead in Geekbench Vulkan suggests it is better suited for Vulkan-based applications. Its 40 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it ideal for low-power systems, compact workstations, or environments where space and heat are at a premium. The T600 also offers FP16 support at 3.418 TFLOPS, which the GTX 970 lacks entirely. For users whose primary workload is Vulkan compute and who prioritize efficiency and form factor, the T600 is the logical choice. For everyone else, the GTX 970’s overwhelming benchmark lead makes it the obvious pick.